1/23/1985 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

JAN 23 1985 BOOK ; 91,11 F. 65 the proposed bank would generate anywhere near the trips estimated by staff. Director Keating did not agree that staff's figures were that far off and questioned why a bank would want to locate there if they would be having just 20 or 30 trips as the applicant estimates in his traffic count poll. Commissioner Bird pointed out that a branch bank would not generate as many trips as a full bank, but Director Keating noted that they apparently expect enough traffic to warrant two drive-in windows. Attorney O'Haire reiterated that if the owner is allowed to develop only Lot M, a gas station or a Jiffy Mart might be built on that corner. In conclusion, he urged the Board to uphold the Planning & Zoning Commission's approval of the site plan. Thomas Collins, owner of the subject property, stressed that they decided to go with a bank because of the concern about the type of commercial establishment that might be built on that corner. He explained that if a majority of the residents decide that a commercial establishment on Lot L is not wanted, he then could not go any further with this site plan, but he could go ahead and build something on Lot M that would generate more traffic as he must be granted access to the property. Mr. Collins also objected to the 1979 traffic report by staff, and personally believed that a bank on this corner would generate only 200 of the traffic estimated by staff. He noted that although the building is approximately 8000 square feet, the bank itself contains only 3100 sq. ft., and in all likelihood the bank actually will generate less traffic than the office area, which contains 4300 sq. ft. Director Keating, however, apparently does not agree with the concept of the smaller the bank, the less traffic generated. Mr. Collins stressed that they have done everything that they could to provide fair ingress and egress to the property and do not understand staff's appeal of the site plan, even including 30